Jussie Smollett case assigned special prosecutor

Kimsang

Empire actor Jussie Smollett hit the news recently when he claimed to have had a hate-crime directed towards him.

Upon investigating the police decided the were going to press charges against Smollett, because they said they had evidence he fabricated the event.

In steps Kim fox(Empire fan), State's attorney, Illinois to drop all charges.

It had been feared that all charges could never been tried again, because of some weird legal technicality(Not a lawyer) but now it appears the case has been assigned a special prosecutor(Dan Webb) who can revisit any previous charges.

Police say they have evidence that proves Smollett staged the attack

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jussie-smollett-case-former-us-attorney-dan-webb-to-serve-as-special-prosecutor-2019-08-24/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRvVKmflhY0

Sonny noggs

Great news.

Kimsang

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Great news.

I can't wait to see how this turns out.

Kim Foxx needs to be held accountable. Smollett too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkoObqAisAI

biko

I suppose it's a good thing there is so little racism that hate crimes needs to be fabricated.

Roger Hassenforder

His attack is still valid; although staged (allegedly), it is inevitable he would have been subject to such a racist homophobic attack.
If he's guilty of anything, its giving employment to two men to (allegedly) stage the attack, and draw awareness to what could happen.

suicide_circus

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

His attack is still valid; although staged (allegedly), it is inevitable he would have been subject to such a racist homophobic attack.
If he's guilty of anything, its giving employment to two men to (allegedly) stage the attack, and draw awareness to what could happen.

DavidLyons_

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

His attack is still valid; although staged (allegedly), it is inevitable he would have been subject to such a racist homophobic attack.
If he's guilty of anything, its giving employment to two men to (allegedly) stage the attack, and draw awareness to what could happen.

Fairly sure you’re on the wind-up Roger but we do have numerous posters on here that would seriously believe that.

Sonny noggs

If he had apologised or even kept his mouth shut after the deal he would likely have gotten away with it. Instead his lawyer was giving interviews claiming he was exonerated. Karma.

Roger Hassenforder

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

Fairly sure you’re on the wind-up Roger but we do have numerous posters on here that would seriously believe that.

Sorry Dave, couldnt resist channelling my inner Godfrey Elfwick

weldoninhio

Dave Chappelle's new standup show on Netflix covers this. It is f'king a hilarious piece of comedy!!

Overheal

Kim Fox is the real news here.

simongurnick

weldoninhio wrote: »

Dave Chappelle's new standup show on Netflix covers this. It is f'king a hilarious piece of comedy!!

Watched that last night. Juicy Smoothie!

notobtuse

Even with a special prosecutor assigned, Jussie Smollett will probably walk away free as a bird due to the decision by Cook County Attorney Kim Foxx to drop the case, despite the grand jury recommending charges be brought. But if it is discovered something nefarious went on in order to get charges dropped, or if it is determined federal crimes were committed Smollett isn’t out of hot water. Kim Foxx on the other hand is another matter. She could suffer the wrath from her whitewash of justice. Funny, Foxx said she’d welcome an independent probe into her office’s dismissal of felony disorderly conduct charges that accused Smollett of staging a racist and anti-gay attack on himself, but she filed a motion opposing retired appellate judge Sheila O’Brien’s demand for a special prosecutor. And unless Foxx is disbarred she probably won’t feel much pain ether as Cook County Democrats have overwhelmingly thrown their support behind her 2020 reelection effort. Democrats! Nothing good ever comes out of Chicago Democratic politics.

Kimsang

notobtuse wrote: »

Even with a special prosecutor assigned, Jussie Smollett will probably walk away free as a bird due to the decision by Cook County Attorney Kim Foxx to drop the case,

Interested why is this so? From what I saw(which wasn't much tbh) I thought the special prosecutor could re-try all charges.

James Brown

Whatever about him lying there's a deeper tale here. Be interesting. I feel sorry for all the people who genuinely have to deal with this. He owes them an apology.

James Brown

notobtuse wrote: »

Even with a special prosecutor assigned, Jussie Smollett will probably walk away free as a bird due to the decision by Cook County Attorney Kim Foxx to drop the case, despite the grand jury recommending charges be brought. But if it is discovered something nefarious went on in order to get charges dropped, or if it is determined federal crimes were committed Smollett isn’t out of hot water. Kim Foxx on the other hand is another matter. She could suffer the wrath from her whitewash of justice. Funny, Foxx said she’d welcome an independent probe into her office’s dismissal of felony disorderly conduct charges that accused Smollett of staging a racist and anti-gay attack on himself, but she filed a motion opposing retired appellate judge Sheila O’Brien’s demand for a special prosecutor. And unless Foxx is disbarred she probably won’t feel much pain ether as Cook County Democrats have overwhelmingly thrown their support behind her 2020 reelection effort. Democrats! Nothing good ever comes out of Chicago Democratic politics.

Ah, you had me going there for a bit. You nearly made a legit comment, so close!

Overheal

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Ah, you had me going there for a bit. You nearly made a legit comment, so close!

I know I was about to like the post and all

notobtuse

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Ah, you had me going there for a bit. You nearly made a legit comment, so close!

Not harsh enough regarding Chicago democrats? How many recent governors of the state have gone to jail? And then there was one shyster who became POTUS and almost destroyed the country. As I said... nothing good comes out of Chicago politics.

Kimsang

notobtuse wrote: »

And unless Foxx is disbarred she probably won’t feel much pain ether as Cook County Democrats have overwhelmingly thrown their support behind her 2020 reelection effort. Democrats! Nothing good ever comes out of Chicago Democratic politics.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Ah, you had me going there for a bit. You nearly made a legit comment, so close!

Chicago are known for their corrupt politics and fewer than 1/5 homicides get solved. Foxx got elected on a mandate of transparency and reform. Now she has very obviously obstructed justice and this is one of many cases the Cook County Police union believe Foxx has perverted. Just last week the democrats have thrown their full support behind her. You should state your opinion or supply something to show he's wrong.

James Brown

Kimsang wrote: »

Chicago are known for their corrupt politics and fewer than 1/5 homicides get solved. Foxx got elected on a mandate of transparency and reform. Now she has very obviously obstructed justice and this is one of many cases the Cook County Police union believe Foxx has perverted. Just last week the democrats have thrown their full support behind her. You should state your opinion or supply something to show he's wrong.

We were talking about Smollet not MAGA Kim.

Overheal

notobtuse wrote: »

Not harsh enough regarding Chicago democrats? How many recent governors of the state have gone to jail? And then there was one shyster who became POTUS and almost destroyed the country. As I said... nothing good comes out of Chicago politics.

“Almost destroyed the country”

Like how exactly? What means of destruction? Metaphorically? Atomically? anatomically? Or just by your gut feeling and truthiness?

Kimsang

Matt Barrett wrote: »

We were talking about Smollet not MAGA Kim.

Ah I believe maybe it is you that has misinterpreted. Notobtuse said the dems had thrown their weight behind Foxx's 2020 reelection (in Chicago the state's attourney is an elected position) So the democratic party just last week threw their weight behind foxx for re-election as state's attorney for Chicago.

Do you think this is right given what she has done? Surely you wouldn't continue to support her?

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

Ah I believe maybe it is you that has misinterpreted. Notobtuse said the dems had thrown their weight behind Foxx's 2020 reelection (in Chicago the state's attourney is an elected position) So the democratic party just last week threw their weight behind foxx for re-election as state's attorney for Chicago.

Do you think this is right given what she has done? Surely you wouldn't continue to support her?

See also: Brett Kavanaugh; presumption of innocence (law). GOP have circled the wagons around more than one shady person. So what’s the complaint there, that the DNC plays by the same playbook as the RNC? Because, that’s what you’re complaining about. Even though it doesn’t look good for Foxx, she hasn’t been convicted of anything and it only makes sense for the DNC to bank on her exoneration. Sure, Rrepublicans tripled down on Trump - well, to this day, even though the DOJ has enough evidence to convict him of obstruction of justice on the sole provision that he was anyone’s but the POTUS at the time of the indictment. But there they are, raising millions for his re-election, and there you are, not being a cryowhine about it.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

See also: Brett Kavanaugh; presumption of innocence (law). GOP have circled the wagons around more than one shady person. So what’s the complaint there, that the DNC plays by the same playbook as the RNC? Because, that’s what you’re complaining about. Even though it doesn’t look good for Foxx, she hasn’t been convicted of anything and it only makes sense for the DNC to bank on her exoneration. Sure, Rrepublicans tripled down on Trump - well, to this day, even though the DOJ has enough evidence to convict him of obstruction of justice on the sole provision that he was anyone’s but the POTUS at the time of the indictment. But there they are, raising millions for his re-election, and there you are, not being a cryowhine about it.

The most blatant case of whataboutery coming from the biggest accuser of whataboutery!

But I'll try and Steelman your argument, correct me if I'm wrong.
The RNC are bad guys too, so Foxx is the lesser of two evils.

Even if i grant everthing you say about the RNC it still does not excuse throwing their support behind Foxx again. They could easily get another democratic candidate in that spot in Chicago.

This case from the beginning has been out in the open, what Foxx did is inexcusable and undeniable. Completely different from cries of "But Trump..... Russia!"

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

The most blatant case of whataboutery coming from the biggest accuser of whataboutery!

But I'll try and Steelman your argument, correct me if I'm wrong.
The RNC are bad guys too, so Foxx is the lesser of two evils.

Even if i grant everthing you say about the RNC it still does not excuse throwing their support behind Foxx again. They could easily get another democratic candidate in that spot in Chicago.

This case from the beginning has been out in the open, what Foxx did is inexcusable and undeniable. Completely different from cries of "But Trump..... Russia!"

Woah now, I’m the biggest accuser of whataboutery? Please prove this, with some sort of ranking system. Prove that positive, friend.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

See also: Brett Kavanaugh; presumption of innocence (law). GOP have circled the wagons around more than one shady person.

The only shady person I saw during that show-trial was Christine Ford. Her story had more holes than a crocheted blanket.

Every witness, including her then best friend, have denied under penalty of law ever even being there.

Her Gofundme campaign also raised over 700,000$.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTBxPPx62s4

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

The only shady person I saw during that show-trial was Christine Ford. Her story had more holes than a crocheted blanket.

Every witness, including her then best friend, have denied under penalty of law ever even being there.

Her Gofundme campaign also raised over 700,000$.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTBxPPx62s4

You already responded to this post. I’m still waiting on proof I am the biggest accuser of whataboutery. I know how much you hate people labeling others without proof and I want to help you stick to your principles.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

You already responded to this post. I’m still waiting on proof I am the biggest accuser of whataboutery. I know how much you hate people labeling others without proof and I want to help you stick to your principles.

I confused you with Joey. You guys all look the same with your bold username;).

You are not innocent of the crime though;

Overheal wrote: »

Lol the entire thesis of this thread is whataboutery in service of deflecting from alt-right violence so don’t gimme that.

And indeed it was whataboutery by you a few posts up.

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

I confused you with Joey. You guys all look the same with your bold username;).

You are not innocent of the crime though;



And indeed it was whataboutery by you a few posts up.

So I am not the biggest accuser of whataboutery after all. I accept your apology.

However as the self-appointed thread-attorney for Joey I must demand that you generate proof for accusing him of being the biggest whataboutery accuser. Unless you wish to withdraw such a clam, of course.

Kimsang

Overheal wrote: »

So I am not the biggest accuser of whataboutery after all. I accept your apology.

Do you think accusing someone of whataboutery and accusing someone of racism should be held to the same standard to prove 'beyond reasonable doubt'

Overheal

Kimsang wrote: »

Do you think accusing someone of whataboutery and accusing someone of racism should be held to the same standard to prove 'beyond reasonable doubt'

Woah, what does racism have to do with it?

And when did the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard apply? Is this a criminal offense, civil offense, or gentleman’s offense? “Beyond reasonable doubt” applies in law to criminal matters.

But are you saying anyway, now, that it is okay to label others without proof when it’s convenient for you? That’s awfully what your post seems to portray.